Just for Fun.

[neurosis]

really Fox is the only one.

lol. I actually consider the WSJ to be conservative leaning.  Not Fox conservative, but they're definitely not unbiased in their reporting.  They probably need a few more categories of division in there.  I would consider WSJ to be just right of center. 

[Smit]

Unless otherwise noted, AllSides rates only online content, not TV, radio, or broadcast content.

From the web site.

I wouldn't argue with their chart much except to wonder when it was published. Fox news has lost many of their legitimate newscasters recently so if it's not pretty new it might be off there. And they do break the editorial section away from the news in a couple cases (WSJ and New York Times).

[neurosis]

From the web site.

As far as the WSJ goes, I think this is far more accurate. 

Do note the high credibility rating. At least they're more honest about the bias in reporting.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/wall-street-journal/

[Incogneeto]

As far as the WSJ goes, I think this is far more accurate. 

Do note the high credibility rating. At least they're more honest about the bias in reporting.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/wall-street-journal/

Soooo you are saying "I Did Good"??

There is sooo much crap out there from BOTH sides I believe Nothing.

Smit can kick me for trying to be unbiased.

[neurosis]

Soooo you are saying "I Did Good"??

Not if this is what you believe.

really Fox is the only one.

[Incogneeto]

Not if this is what you believe.

I was referring to antennae television.

[beej]

Here in Kansas the GOP is pushing to overturn a court decision protecting the rights of people to not be fired for being LBGTQ. The GOP nominee for governor announced one of his leading priorities is prohibiting trans people from participating in sports.

Really? Is that really a huge problem in Kansas? Answer: It's not. So why the push to prohibit it? I'll not answer that for you, but it's pretty obvious.

I guess on the flip side, when you got a democrat Governor, her first official act was to sign LGBTQ protections. So one could ask was this really necessary in a state like Kansas?
http://www.ontopmag.com/article/46608/In_Her_First_Official_Act_As_Governor_Kansas_Laura_Kelly_Signs_LGBT_Protections_Order

[Smit]

I guess on the flip side, when you got a democrat Governor, her first official act was to sign LGBTQ protections. So one could ask was this really necessary in a state like Kansas?
http://www.ontopmag.com/article/46608/In_Her_First_Official_Act_As_Governor_Kansas_Laura_Kelly_Signs_LGBT_Protections_Order

Read the article you posted, the answer is there.

[Smit]

I guess on the flip side, when you got a democrat Governor, her first official act was to sign LGBTQ protections. So one could ask was this really necessary in a state like Kansas?
http://www.ontopmag.com/article/46608/In_Her_First_Official_Act_As_Governor_Kansas_Laura_Kelly_Signs_LGBT_Protections_Order

Read the article you posted, the answer is there.

[beej]

Read the article you posted, the answer is there.

I read the article but your argument seemed to be, unless I misunderstood, that there is not enough of a trans community in Kansas to fight against having biological males competing in women sports to be worth the time, so it begs the question is there's not enough to fight against, why is there enough to fight for?

and one other question, do you think it should be illegal for a Catholic School to fire a teacher that is in a Gay marriage, since the church considers that to be a grave sin?

[Smit]

I read the article but your argument seemed to be, unless I misunderstood, that there is not enough of a trans community in Kansas to fight against having biological males competing in women sports to be worth the time, so it begs the question is there's not enough to fight against, why is there enough to fight for?

and one other question, do you think it should be illegal for a Catholic School to fire a teacher that is in a Gay marriage, since the church considers that to be a grave sin?

The article you quoted mentions nothing about sports, only human rights. It doesn't matter if there's only one person, don't discriminate. Don't try to make it more complex when it's not.

As far as the catholic church goes, imo they shouldn't. If they're alright with covering priests molesting altar boys (or anybody else) they don't have any high ground to preach from, once again  imo.

What a judge would say might be different.

[beej]

The article you quoted mentions nothing about sports, only human rights. It doesn't matter if there's only one person, don't discriminate. Don't try to make it more complex when it's not.

As far as the catholic church goes, imo they shouldn't. If they're alright with covering priests molesting altar boys (or anybody else) they don't have any high ground to preach from, once again  imo.

What a judge would say might be different.

So if I understand you correctly, you do feel like it should be legal to fire pedophiles. In any circumstance or only if they are acting out while on the clock?

[Smit]

So if I understand you correctly, you do feel like it should be legal to fire pedophiles. In any circumstance or only if they are acting out while on the clock?

Fire pedophiles? Are you talking priests here? Fkers ought to be in prison just like anybody else would be.

[beej]

Fire pedophiles? Are you talking priests here? Fkers ought to be in prison just like anybody else would be.

OK Good, some common ground. What if you find out they have the tendency towards pedophilia but haven't acted out, should a company be forced to hire them?

[Smit]

OK Good, some common ground. What if you find out they have the tendency towards pedophilia but haven't acted out, should a company be forced to hire them?

You're not making a whole lot of sense today Beej so I'm going to bid you adieu at this point.